I doubt we'll see a anything so gauche as a cup of tea being had, but it took only about 20 seconds of Saturday's panel discussion on The Nation to establish that the National and Act parties once again have an arrangement to channel votes to an Act candidate in the Epsom electorate.

Host Lisa Owen explained that National's candidate, international man of mystery Paul Goldsmith, had declined to appear on the candidate panel because he was "concentrating on the party vote". He apparently couldn't make up a better story, which is presumably why he writes biography rather than fiction.

There followed a series of awkward exchanges in which Act's David Seymour worked through a series of mostly irrelevant answers he'd prepared earlier, but if anything indicated how local and parochial his campaign is really going to be it was his unprompted offering, around the 10 minute mark, that "the people of Epsom" ...

... do not want to have their neighbourhoods intensified with eight-storey towers next to their homes and the kind of rates corruption that they get from Len Brown ...

The Greens' Julie Anne Genter interjected to point out that Act was the party of oppositon to regulation and Seymour responded:

What I'm arguing is that the people of Epsom have bought into certain property rights and the character of their community ...

So, if you were unclear, Act regards the Resource Management Act as a blight on freedom, property rights and productivity and would happily lay waste to the RMA and all regulations of its ilk -- except where they protect the interests of wealthy people who may vote Act.

We've seen this particular kind of wild ideological dissonance before, of course, in the strident opposition to Auckland's Unitary Plan from the likes of Dick Quax and Cameron Brewer. And I don't think that's a coincidence. It's a real shame that first Genter then Owen stopped Seymour before he could really get rolling, because he was promising to dig himself an awesomely large hole with the bit about Len Brown's "rates corruption".

But I think we heard enough to confirm that the fix is in in Epsom and that while Goldsmith ghosts around not even really pretending to be an electorate candidate, Seymour will say whatever he thinks will get Epsom voters to vote for him, and he will have both the rhetoric and the grey battalions of the Auckland centre-right with him.

So yes, Aucklanders, I'm saying that with Semour having basically announced that he'll be running as the oppostion to Len Brown, the Epsom campaign might look a bit like the mayoral campaign. And yes, I know there's quite a bit of irony there given the present (until Friday) MP's criminal situation. Just try and enjoy it for what it is, okay?

The people of Epsom it seems would vote for a parrot standing as the local ACT candidate so long as it's screeches were - tax cuts less government tax cuts - clearly, given it's two most recent constituent MPs and lack of moral fortitude there in. In short - in terms of 'quality of candidate' they couldn't care less.Strange rich people.

So the key issue for ACT voters nationwide is the 8 Story Limit for Epsom. I think we can fairly surmise they’re not going for the party vote any more.

No, they’ll go full nimby in Epsom and still shout to the rest of the country about how the rights of developers are sacred.

Seymour’s attempt to claim that people who’d bought houses had obtained property rights around “the character of their community” – which, let’s not forget, would be in conflict with the rights to build of other property owners – was priceless. As Matthew says, a party of rent-seekers and cartelists.

Edit: I should note that the "eight stories next to everyone's house" claim is total fucking bullshit, and even less true since Len Brown let the Unitary Plan be gutted.

Clearly then, Mr Seymour did not take on board the message I gave him when he came door knocking some weeks ago. I could kind of tell by the way he started to back down the steps - probably as I was hitting my stride and critiquing this exact policy line - which was the main thrust of the introductory letter we epsom-ites had received. I'd love to think there are more than just one or two of us in this electorate who don't think the way this version of ACT thinks - probably not enough of us though.

Damn, I miss living in the (non-posh part of the) Epsom electorate. Election time was always madness. I once had a pretend polling phone call where all the questions were worded to be pro-ACT propaganda, a voicemail where a recording of Rodney Hide pretended to be leaving a casual message, and a full set of the Brethren pamphlets.

Meanwhile Nick Smith is criticizing the selfishness of rich lifestyle blockers who he says are stopping the subdivisions on the outskirts that could be homes for tragically deprived young families who apparently have access to unlimited petrol.

ETA: The high walls and dense bushes shrouding the character filled doctor's surgeries were beautifully counterpointed by hi-rise above the smog of the angry gridlocked commuters. When I lived in Clonbern Rd, I'd fall asleep to the lovely sound of decelerating trucks on the offramp. Ah, Epsom, where I lost both my virginity and my car (stolen 3 times), how dare they sully you.

Banks is the story of a man who defines his life against something he ends up imitating faithfully.

His inability to identify self-serving advisors has blighted his career and who knows what it has cost him personally.

The man had many chances to do the right thing rather than surrender to lazy loathing of whole groups of fellow humans - and he has failed that test so far. I wish him a gentle retirement full of contemplation and opportunities for redemption in deeds not words.

I miss Rodney in his yellow jacket! I remember one morning during the campaign cycling along Market Rd (yes, Market) and there he was standing at the intersection in his eye catching attire appealing to the passing commuters. I wanted to heckle him but he rendered me speechless...

I wish, but don't think so (presuming you mean they will support a candidate - so far as I know Goldsmith will be standing). Firstly, it's one more seat for their bloc, which is tenuous. ACT is the only party likely to get a seat that has never gone with Labour. Second, they need not to be the most extreme right wing party in parliament, even with a commanding chunk of the seats. It just doesn't look good when trying to form a government that claims to be centrist.

Just from perception alone, since NZers tend to be centrist, it doesn't help that self perception amongst potential voters, to realize that more than half of the votes are going to parties to the left of you. People who psychologically prefer to back the winning team will have good reason to hedge and go for one of the little middle parties, NZF, UF, Maori. They might even go Labour.

This has always been the big danger of the whole Key government, that it would lead to a structural collapse of the right. I thought it would come about by voters finding ACT pointless. It's quite something that it actually just completely imploded due to incompetence and dishonesty. Will this be a cypher that Epsom wishes to continue to hold on to? I don't know.